@DoYaSeeMe I won't go into communication and transparency between community and developers as i'm sure it goes without saying that should be nurtured and constantly be improved upon for a healthy relationship for both sides sake. I would like to keep this thread reasonably positive with potential improvements or fixes and that topic will set me off. 🤐
What other solutions are available, even if it's just for the few and couldn't private run servers help cover this cost? I'm sure they could do advertising in the loading screens to help with costs or even be creative with something else. I remember someone saying have the display banners in game have adverts on them but i'm sure they could do others too.
I understand for the majority of players the benefit of having instant gameplay being convenient but with more and more playing ranked, almost 50% over 5 hrs per season now then surely they could improve something in that regard as i'm sure those trying to climb higher ranks would opt for match stability rather than instant que times. I know i would.
I said this previously with ranked matches having equally skilled players in your team and be willing to wait longer for that they apparently fixed this season.
Just don't ask @maximas1986 as i think he'll disagree it's been fixed... 😛
Also, would you mind expanding on the UI/UX improvements and code optimisations. What's wrong or could be improved on it and how does it relate to problems like hitreg, picking stuff up, abilities not working and getting shot through a doors, delays and performance ect.. Try keep it on topic. 🙂
@hayhor I haven't been that cruel yet but i'm sure it's coming. 👿
@apostolateofDOOMRespawn devs know about other solutions much better than us, because they are not beginners, they worked on CoD, Battlefield, Titanfall 1&2. They have years of firsthand experience, so their choice wasn't an impulsive one. Also, it wasn't even forced on them by EA, because Apex project got started before Respawn becoming part of EA. Their collab with Multiplay dates back to at least Titanfall 2. This means they had a lot of time to explore server solutions and it actually worked, because the result is considered one of the best, Apex being the fastest and one of the biggest scaling games to date. They have absolutely no reason to switch to something different, so it's basically a waste of time to consider this, at least for this game.
But the experience is not ideal, even though I claim that the solution is the best. Why? Because this is a game that is very demanding in terms of processing and using features that are very sensitive to network problems.. Unfortunately, the latter can't be fixed. It's about high demand that can't be met, millions of miles of cables that can break, millions of routers that can fail, thousands of ISPs that do shady stuff to keep their costs competitive. Therefore, our last hope relies on the attempt to fulfill the computing demand somehow. This can only be done through optimizations, simplifications and software and hardware upgrades.
Optimizations are in the hands of Respawn, they need to clean and refactor the code and the assets so that they put as little pressure on the CPUs as possible. This process is not easy, you can read about bigger studios spending years to rough the edges of their products without succeeding.
Simplification is, unfortunately, not really possible, things actually go the opposite way with the introduction of new features such as abilities, interactibles, vehicles, etc.. We'd probalby see significant improvement if overall speed would be reduced or if all projectiles would become hitscan, but then Apex wouldn't be the game we felt in love with.
Software updates happen regularly, these are usually part of server maintenance. Some hardware replacements are sometimes included, as well. But when it comes to upgrading to the latest, most powerful parts on the market, cost becomes a prohibitive factor. The ratio of cost over performance goes up exponentially, simply not worth it after a certain point. Also, part availability kicks in, the most performant parts are often very limited. Actually, there is a serious chip shortage going on these days: https://www.networkworld.com/article/3602456/youre-not-imagining-things-there-is-a-serious-chip-shortage.html . Proof that Covid is a serious issue.
@DoYaSeeMe Battlefield was one that got server upgrades and also private servers.
It's understandable that any developer who releases a massive online multiplayer game like Apex first have to focus on server/network stability from launch. Things like tick rate and uncapped framerates come second to that but it's been over 2 years now with no improvement. Framerate is still capped at 190 and delay between actions or them not even happening now..
This last bit is frankly unacceptable whatever way you look at it.
The higher the tick rate value, the faster the exchange between the player and the server. So, a higher tick rate results in a more responsive online experience which is very important for an FPS game and not so much in other genres for obvious reasons. Especially one that advertises itself as an e sport and with, as you touched upon, the speed and pace we know and love.
Latency, hardware, location, server type are other things on our end that we can do something about but when we have low latency, hardware that far exceeds recommended req and connected to the closest we can given our limited choice, the only thing left is the servers or optimisations on the line as other games run fluid that are far more demanding than Apex, both user and server side.
''The ratio of cost over performance goes up exponentially, simply not worth it after a certain point.''
I mentioned this in the OP with ''this is a process of evaluating costs and benefits''.
''But when it comes to upgrading to the latest, most powerful parts on the market, cost becomes a prohibitive factor.''
I would say that with how successful Apex was after launch and since, it far exceeded expectations, has seasonal collection events with an heirloom locked behind a paywall that's 3x the price of a bought AAA title then surely they have had the revenue to make these investments?
Same can be said with next gen consoles that other games are already ahead in.
They might be experienced but when we have been voicing these problems since launch and got considerably worse since S3 (which is why i don't think it's solely down to servers) then adding flyers, prowlers, vehicles (when they could have just made smaller and more enclosed maps without the need for them) or abilities that need to travel from client to server multiple times (going off what you said in a previous thread) when the delay was already bad doesn't look like they're doing a very good job when the game is suffering for them.
This was all long before the chip shortage and not meaning to sound disrespectful but i'm still waiting for something constructive or a potential alternative other than reasons why they can't do something. I don't want you to bore either of us in explaining or repeating the ins and outs of game development. 😛
Surely an independent dev would have some ideas... 🤔
@DoYaSeeMeI'm more than happy to gain insight and be educated on some of these matters but i also don't want you to waste your time doing it just for my sake as i have seen you go through similar things multiple times. You got to get that gaming in too... That's not an unwillingness to learn on my side and also not what this thread is for as i would dm you if that was the case but by all means explain yourself when presenting something for understanding.
I do want to hear there's a better solution because the games state is awful atm (even avid supporters of the game think/say so) and compromise would be each side making concessions finding a middle ground. It doesn't sound like you're doing that. Being told when the game is completely broken that it's the best to the alternatives so nothing is going to change isn't meeting each other half way.
I have tried throwing many ideas out there and shown understanding of the scaling situation at launch ect but we are couple years in now and that's not being reciprocated when looking at it from a purely performance perspective. I'm not talking about the general population but those that want the best out of what they have in a competitive environment, even if it's just extra options client side.
Many/most, if not all users here have these game related issue and while some will voice it, they either don't speak about them anymore because they're tired of it or they know nothing will change. That doesn't change the fact the issues are there.
''I think Respawn should focus on more doable stuff, which can visibly and definitely improve Apex: code optimizations, user experience, transparency, communication, content.''
Giving extra content when the core game is totally broken means nothing and same goes for communication when being told they fixed certain issues but nothing has actually changed which has happened a fair few times now. Just the most recent example being ranked. Actions speak louder than words.
I would like you who is in the industry to come up with potential alternatives, improvements, ideas or anything else that might improve it except toeing the line of Respawn as to why we have what we have and it's the best they can do, because it's currently crap.
Abilities not working, getting shot through doors not milliseconds but full (several) seconds later, unable to pick up items or the game giving visual or audio confirmation but taking to long to process that it's not actually the case are things that could be improved upon. Expensive to fix? Probably, but not impossible.
@apostolateofDOOMI noticed you said flyers and prowlers, I don't even know what prowlers are, but the flyers are 90% of the time flying with an useless blue box with items you already have, the only thing valuable in them that is worth exposing your location by literally shooting them is the healing items, however you usually get so many heals every 100meters I find myself pinging shield cell or syringe sometimes even the bigger heals..
@DoYaSeeMeah yes the Dunning Kruger Effect, one of our most favourite and hated effect there is..
@DoYaSeeMe We'll go with you analogy..
If the car is on the pitstop with a flat tyre and everyone is screaming to change it but they're more concerned about the alloys being polished, tuning the stereo and giving the sponsorship logo a lick of paint clearly costing the race then i would say those in the crowd have a justified reason to complain as there were more important and pressing matters that needed attending to.
How is the Dunning Kruger effect applicable when the devs are on mount stupid taking nearly 2 years to implement obvious but also relatively easy fixes that were suggested by the community and myself like increasing the kill cap when ranked was introduced that took them 18 months or being ranked with players in the same tier they didn't actually fix or balancing Wraith when the problem was common knowledge but it took them 8 whole seasons to address it.
These are just from S8 and there are so many other examples of negligence by Respawn that i could go into.
If you meant in my case, i already admitted in my very first post my lack understanding of certain issues (no sense of superiority whatsoever) and why i would like input from someone like you who proclaims to have a deeper understanding of the topic but for some reason you're defending not changing a tyre with not one suggestion or potential alternative they could do to improve it in relation to the first post either now or in the future. How very strange...
Edit: I don't want to get into pointless debate with you if you're not willing or able to add something that could potentially come out of it.
@damsonwhufndthis Prowlers are those things at bloodhounds trials. I only brought that up because as you said they're both basically useless that doesn't really enrich the experience but is a extra load on the servers.
@DoYaSeeMeThis is why i'm chucking everything out there to be discussed so those in the know in such matters could explain if or why something was or isn't possible, if not now then perhaps in the future.
Separate servers for ranked/competitive.
Change or optimise the way packets are sent.
Removing or lowing the load on servers.
Clients choosing their own rates.
Different competitive modes with less players so it doesn't effect performance as much?
Server selector - We already discussed this and i agree for most instant is better but from a purely competitive perspective i think choice would improve the situation.
Changes to lag compensation or limiting the possible ping in a match.
If not these then maybe something else? Throw me a bone here..
@DoYaSeeMeDoes code refactoring address any of the problems i mentioned?
I forgot about this thread so sorry for late reply. 🥳
@DoYaSeeMeSounds like we desperately need some of that then.
What about an upgrade to a new engine? Remember it's nearly Easter!!
@DoYaSeeMeI think you missed the Easter part... 😛
How come Fortnite and other games did it then? We have a 10yr plan, apparently...
@DoYaSeeMeIf the game is in this state after 2 years what's it going to be like in 5 let alone 10 the devs said they had for Apex...
You mean complex like projectiles instead of hitscan? Battlefields? They also got server upgrades after backlash.
I don't think that servers are the sole problem as it's probably more the spaghetti network coding of the game from all the updates that needs addressing as it's only after updates the problem keeps getting worse.
Better movement and generally much faster gameplay? Dirty bomb, they have much smaller players per match but it's very responsive and more stable than Apex when support stopped for that game years ago and they also had an instant play and server selector.
Using an outdated engine that's limited by todays standards doesn't makes sense for the time they want to keep this game running especially when their competitors are already announcing those upgrades.
Edit: Regardless of limitations of the game engine or comparing it to other titles. It's not my fault they made a service that's to complex for them to run effectively or make it future proof.. That's what they get paid for and in comparison to others, some much older titles, they're doing a pretty poor job.
@DoYaSeeMeThat's still 50% it'll improve and the problems will be there regardless after a few years of updates anyway, at least the engine can handle it, likely much better than current. I also don't see why they can't make similar modifications to source 2 or equivalent in Unreal and port it. If it doesn't feel the same they can change things to make it similar or even much better than before as they're not as limited. How are they going to stay up to date for 10yrs at this rate?
This isn't a product, it's a live service so they can bring something fresh during an upgrade season easily... That's one of the benefits of what they're doing and what Fortnite did.
Why would they do it? Because all their competitors are already upgrading and they want to stay relevant for next gen. Why would you risk going into debt making a whole new game when you have a successful one with a huge player base sat there already asking for those upgrades?
